So the researchers turned to a new idea: they picked a target in the virus that is less likely to change: an internal part, rather than the more traditional approach of picking something on the surface of the virus.

So the researchers turned to a new idea: they picked a target in the virus that is less likely to change: an internal part, rather than the more traditional approach of picking something on the surface of the virus.

What part of the above do you not understand?

I understand completely, that is the target, but what is the new MECHANISM to reach that target? Not the same processes previously used as you seem to claim, as they would not see a different outcome from the same process.

It is clear that you have no clue on what is being discussed by the papers or me.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

So the researchers turned to a new idea: they picked a target in the virus that is less likely to change: an internal part, rather than the more traditional approach of picking something on the surface of the virus.

So the researchers turned to a new idea: they picked a target in the virus that is less likely to change: an internal part, rather than the more traditional approach of picking something on the surface of the virus.

No connection.

So you are clueless. How do you change the target without changing the mechanisms used? (Hint: You cannot.)

The mechanisms between the two papers are the same thus the targets are also the same.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

I have read the paper and unlike you understand what they are saying. I am sure you could find a bright high school senior that might be able to sit down and explain it to you until you understand it if you really try.

In the interim let me give you an example. If I am going to take a carburetor off of a motorcycle, I will use an appropriately sized wrench. Using a wrench which is larger or smaller than the attachment bolt will not work. If I wish to adjust that carburetor, I will use a screwdriver. Now if I try to use that screwdriver to remove the assembly I will be wasting my time, just as I would waste my time trying to make the adjustment with the wrench. The same applies to biology so the same virus/NS gene combination will not target the exterior or interior of Hep C just by declaring that is the intent. The virus/NS gene combo attacks the interior only. That is why both papers are connected.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

the canadian study didn't target the inner nor did they use the flu virus or use the human/chimp ando combo.

no connection

You know this how? Which specific adenoviruses and NS proteins were used? What was the target of the NS proteins and why were the adenoviruses used? You have no idea and will only try to make different claims based on your desire that chimps were not used in the development of this study.

Maybe you can just resort back to name calling, that really makes your case for you.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

In their paper the researchers describe how they adapted two adenoviruses to carry NS (nonstructural) proteins from HCV genotype 1B. One adenovirus was sourced from a rare human serotype (Ad6, human adenovirus 6) and the other from chimpanzee (ChAd3, chimpanzee adenovirus 3).

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

Hadley the one whos clueless. You are the one clutching at straws, trying desperately to connect two studies that have no connection.

You have read abstracts that much is clear

Who is Hadley?

I have read the abstracts and also discussed them with a PhD molecular biologist that used to work for me, a friend who is a molecular biologist working in childhood cancer research, and pharmaceutical researcher who lives next door to get a better understanding. All three agreed on the connection between the two paper's approach. How about you?

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein